vk_use_cabinet

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds the key behavioral note that subsequent API calls use the new cabinet's credentials, but does not mention side effects like preserving or invalidating prior credentials or error conditions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Very concise: one main sentence plus a single arg note. Front-loaded with the action. The reference to {svc}_list_cabinets is slightly awkward with the placeholder but efficient.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With an output schema present, return details are covered. The description explains the core effect (credential switch) but omits what happens on invalid name, whether the active cabinet is changed permanently, and any required prerequisites. For a state-changing operation, more behavioral context would help.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It says 'name: the cabinet to activate (see {svc}_list_cabinets)', which clarifies the parameter's meaning and points to a source for valid values. However, it doesn't specify format, case sensitivity, or whether the name must already exist.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource: switch the active cabinet, and clarifies the effect on subsequent calls. This distinguishes it from siblings like vk_add_cabinet or vk_remove_cabinet, though it could more explicitly state what it is not (e.g., not adding or removing).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies use when you need to change the active cabinet, but does not explicitly state when to use this versus vk_add_cabinet or vk_set_key. It references vk_list_cabinets for name lookup, which is a helpful pointer but not a full usage guideline.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.